Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 494 F.2d 955 - United States v. Leonard

United States v. Leonard’s Empirical Analysis

494 F.2d 955 · 1974

Citation profile

245
cited by 245 later decisions
16
states following
July 2012
most recently cited

128 federal appellate · 9 district · 78 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 245 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably United States v. Haldeman (1976), United States v. Sampol (1980)

128 federal appellate · 9 district · 78 state decisions — followed in 16 states

133019741980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Bruton v. United States · Giglio v. United States · Roviaro v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 245 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the prejudice caused a defendant by error does not somehow evaporate or diminish simply because his counsel has failed to object.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The use of informers, accessories, accomplices, false friends, or any of the other betrayals which are ‘dirty business’ may raise serious questions of credibility. To the extent that they do, a defendant is entitled to broad latitude to probe credibility by cross-examination and to have the issues submitted to the jury with careful instructions. . . . We think the administration of justice is better served if stratagems such as we have here are regarded as raising, not questions of law, but issues of credibility.” (Pp. 757-58)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “This reflects the strong federal policy favoring joinder because it expedites the administration of justice, reduces the congestion of the trial dockets, conserves judicial time, lessens the burden upon citizens who must sacrifice both time and money to serve upon juries, and avoids the necessity of recalling witnesses who would otherwise be called upon to testify only once.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.